Mike Loftus: NHL failed to give appropriate punishment

Tuesday

Oct 30, 2007 at 12:01 AMOct 30, 2007 at 11:26 AM

CORRECTED VERSION

Peter Chiarelli was happy to report Monday that Patrice Bergeron was coming off "a good day," and that the Bruins' fine young center was "in decent spirits" as early as Saturday night at Mass. General Hospital.

Mike Loftus

Peter Chiarelli was happy to report Monday that Patrice Bergeron was coming off "a good day," and that the Bruins' fine young center was "in decent spirits" as early as Saturday night at Mass. General Hospital.

Bergeron was being treated for injuries he sustained in that afternoon's game against the Philadelphia Flyers.

There was no word, however, on how Bergeron felt when he was blind-sided in a different way Monday afternoon.

That was when the NHL, via Executive Vice President of Hockey Operations Colin Campbell, announced that Flyers defenseman Randy Jones had been assessed a two-game suspension for checking Bergeron from behind into the boards and glass.

The Flyers lose Jones for two games. Jones loses $5,614.98 in salary. And the NHL loses face. The Bruins don't know yet exactly how much they've lost.

Chiarelli, Boston's general manager, told reporters yesterday that Bergeron, who has no known concussion history, had sustained a Grade 3 concussion - the most severe.

Chiarelli stressed that guidelines "are very general," and added that while "two weeks to a month (before Bergeron might play again) is something that was discussed; it could be that, but it all depends on the player."

One thing's pretty certain: Jones is going to be playing before Bergeron.

And here's another: Bergeron is lucky he's going to be able to play again.

In the statement announcing Jones' suspension, Campbell was quoted as saying "While it is my determination that Jones did not intend to injure his opponent, he did deliver a hard check to a player who was in a vulnerable position." Campbell further stated: "There have been suggestions by some that this hit was comparable to incidents earlier this season where players received significant game suspensions for blows to the head. These comparisons and suggestions are wrong."

Campbell's second comment seems to refer to Flyers he has already suspended this year. Campbell hit Steve Downie with a 20-game penalty for his head-high, full-speed hit on Ottawa's unsuspecting Dean McAmmond in a preseason game, then suspended Jesse Boulerice for 25 games after he all but stalked Vancouver's Ryan Kesler before finally cross-checking Kesler in the head.

But because Jones, who has no history of thuggery, didn't intend to hurt Bergeron, the suspension is only two games?

Wrong call.

Certainly, intent should factor into decisions like this. It would have been hard to justify suspending Jones for as long as Downie or Boulerice, who clearly wanted to bring harm to those they hit.

But just because Jones didn't mean to hurt Bergeron doesn't mean he didn't know he could hurt Bergeron.

Jones is a defenseman. Shift after shift, game after game, he has to chase pucks into his defensive end, often with his face to the glass and boards.

Like anyone who pursues a puck against the boards, he knows how vulnerable he is when his back is turned. Like anyone in that position, he hopes that whoever might be chasing him either isn't coming too fast, or is putting on their brakes. And like anyone in that position, he knows what can happen if he's hit hard when he's in that position.

Despite all that knowledge and experience, Jones didn't slow down. He also had his forearm against the back of Bergeron's neck, adding more force to the impact.

Intentional? Highly doubtful. Jones has seemed truly shaken by the damage caused, and sincerely apologetic. But that doesn't change the fact that what he did was dangerous, and irresponsible.

The Flyers, via general manager Paul Holmgren, said they were "disappointed" Jones was suspended at all. Worse, though, is the number of pundits who have actually assigned some of the blame for the incident to Bergeron.

It has been suggested that he made matters worse by pulling up a couple of feet away from the boards after collecting the puck. It's been suggested, as well, that he purposely engaged in a common sort of "post-up" move: Gaining control of the puck, then turning his back to defenders to protect the puck, and perhaps draw a penalty if hit from behind.

Nonsense.

Bergeron won a race to the puck, and isn't that the point? Was he supposed to take a different, longer route, so that he might pick up the puck at a safer angle? Should he have turned around and skated backward, so he'd see who was coming, and how close, and how fast?

Of course not. Hockey can't be played effectively if players are constantly fearful of being hit when they can't protect themselves. But if the punishment for hitting someone from behind, without clear intent to injure, is a five-minute penalty and a two-game suspension - well, who's afraid of that?

Bruins coach Claude Julien, who visited Bergeron on Saturday night, said, "There's no doubt in my mind that somebody was looking over him."